If right-to-work laws were really about individual freedom, they would simply allow unions to represent voluntary dues-paying members only while respecting employers’ right to recognize or not recognize unions. In other words, the laws would permit states to opt out of federal labor law entirely—and nothing more. But these laws do much more, perhaps because allowing this kind of flexibility and variety would undermine the interests of politically influential employers by unshackling upstart competitors.
Earnings distribution. Average hourly earnings for the 142 union blue-collar occupations in the 1997 NCS sample were $15.07 and ranged from $7.34 to $26.81. For the 175 nonunion blue-collar occupations in the sample, average hourly earnings were $10.95, with a range of $6.47 to $21.41
Earnings distribution. Unionized service workers had average hourly earnings of $13.44, with a range of $5.61 to $26.02. Nonunion service workers averaged $7.81 per hour, with a range of $3.95 to $19.13.
The union is asserting “ownership” over the jobs within the sector of the economy or industry in which they acquire compulsory membership. As such, it is not only an abridgement of the non-union members’ liberty of choice in employment, it is also an infringement on the freedom of the employer’s right to enter into contracts and hire any and all workers with whom he may reach mutually agreeable terms. Indeed, it implies that the union claims control over a vital element of entrepreneurial and managerial decision-making.
the unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining shall be the employer unit, craft unit, plant unit, or subdivision thereof.
valkyryn: Actually, the two don't have anything to do with each other. "Employment at will" is just the default state of the employment relationship in the vast majority of US states, 43 of 50.
Actually, the two don't have anything to do with each other. "Employment at will" is just the default state of the employment relationship in the vast majority of US states, 43 of 50.
In sum, it's difficult for me to see Governor Snyder's approval of the Legislature's decision as being unfair to workers, because my own situation and perspective is so radically different.
Rustic Etruscan: I started to write something along the same lines, but didn't because I believe it to be a political impossibility.
posted by ob1quixote at 11:23 AM on December 12 [+] [!]
I started to write something along the same lines, but didn't because I believe it to be a political impossibility.
posted by ob1quixote at 11:23 AM on December 12 [+] [!]
But what's not murky is the absurd hypocrisy that has to go into making the case for right-to-work legislation.
The way this works is that if there's a labor union at a given business establishment that's bargaining for some higher pay or benefits or better work-rules or whatever it's rapidly going to find that there's a free rider problem. Everyone in the relevant class of workers gets the benefits whether or not they join the union. So something the union is often going to want to bargain for is some kind of rule stating that everyone hired in the relevant class has to join the union, or has to pay dues to the union, or something else along those lines.
Now naturally an employer's not going to want to agree to that. But he's not going to want to agree to higher pay or more vacation days either. That's why it's a negotiation. A right-to-work law is a law banning employers from making that concession.
The impact, obviously, is to make it hard to form strong unions in a given jurisdiction and thus make it a more business-friendly jurisdiction. But note that this same trick works across the board. You could just ban pay raises in general. Any one firm, after all, faces a dilemma. On the one hand it would be more profitable to pay people less. On the other hand, it's also unprofitable to have everyone quit to go work for some other higher-paying company. So a law against pay raises would make everyone more profitable, spurring crazy business investment and job creation. Except nobody does that because it would be (a) insane and (b) obviously unfair. And yet the proponents of right-to-work laws are generally exactly the people most inclined to stand up for freedom of contract under other circumstances.
When Right-To-Work Is Wrong and Un-Libertarian
You Hate 'Right to Work' Laws More Than You Know. Here's Why
Fox News Comedian
homunculus: Do We Really Have to Condemn the Union Protestor Who Punched Fox News Comedian Steven Crowder?
Do We Really Have to Condemn the Union Protestor Who Punched Fox News Comedian Steven Crowder?
State Rep. Lisa Posthumus Lyons (R) on Monday offered an amendment that would have added corrections officers like her husband, Brad, to the list of types of jobs not covered by the anti-union law. Police and firefighters had already been exempted from the legislation.
"When we talk about the brave women in police and fire we need to remember people in corrections," Lyon explained earlier this week, according to MLive.com. "These guys work in conditions that we can't even begin to imagine."
"It's not financial. It's philosophy. I am saying we need to treat our corrections officers that way we treat our police men and women and firefighter men and women."
Democrats, however, claimed that the proposal was an example of Republican hypocrisy.
"Why would she want to exempt her husband if this is such a great bill?" state House Democratic Caucus spokesperson Katie Carey asked. "We were kind of disgusted with it... We were just kind of disappointed that she would offer this amendment at the same time lauding this legislation."
corb: Are you kidding me? Civility and decorum is a punch in the face?
Are you kidding me? Civility and decorum is a punch in the face?
New Villian Emerges In AFP Tent-Gate: Guy Fawkes-Masked ‘Radical Anarchists’
A spokesperson for conservative group Americans For Prosperity told TPM on Thursday the tent’s collapse this week during protests outside the state capitol may have been instigated not by union protesters — some of whom were “helping us” after the tent collapse, she said — but rather by “radical anarchists” wearing Guy Fawkes masks and coming from the Occupy movement.
"There is video footage of him being assaulted. We don't know who the suspect is, but we could do a several month investigation and find the suspect," Inspector Gene Adamczyk, spokesperson for the state police, told TPM on Thursday. "But if Mr. Crowder is not going to prosecute, we have not gained anything, we've wasted resources."
So far Crowder has not sought out police help after he was hit. Adamczyk pointed out he's instead turned the video into a national conservative media tour.
"I saw Mr. Crowder's interview on Sean Hannity and he wants to have an MMA-sanctioned fight with this individual," he said. Crowder told Hannity that if the suspect doesn't come forward for the MMA fight (which he said would be held for charity), Crowder would "press charges."
Adamczyk did not sound impressed by the plan.
"You can't leverage the law for personal gain," he said. "Either you're the victim, or you're not. So if he's the victim of an assault, and he wants to file a complaint, we will definitely investigate it."
« Older When Michael Woodford discovered a staggering leve... | Girls: Fact + Fiction Gallery... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Buy a Shirt